Cited by 15Sports Performance and TrainingCoffee research and impactsMuscle metabolism and nutrition

Supplementation of caffeine and sodium bicarbonate together could not improve performance and performance-related factors in CrossFit participants: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Open access
Ziyaiyan, Amirhosein, Shabkhiz, Fatemeh, Hofmeister, Martin·2023·Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition

Abstract

Background CrossFit includes weightlifting, powerlifting, and gymnastics in various combinations of overloads and repetitions with limited rest periods or no rest between training sets. Due to the novelty of CrossFit, there are few studies on the effect of nutritional strategies on the acute response to this type of sports activity. This study examined the effect of caffeine (CAF) and sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) ingestion separately and in combination on the performance and rate of perceived exertion (RPE) during the Cindy CrossFit workout (Cindy) in CrossFit participants.Method In a double-blind, crossover, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, 20 CrossFit participants underwent five experimental conditions, including control (CON), placebo (PLA), CAF, NaHCO3, and CAF + NaHCO3 (7 days to wash-out between assessment sessions) before completing the Cindy protocol (age: 22.30 ± 2.88 years, body mass index: 25.22 ± 2.51 kg/m2). Capsules containing 6 mg/kg body weight (BW) CAF were consumed 50 min before the Cindy workout while 0.3 g/kg BW NaHCO3 was consumed for 3 days, leading to 120, 90, and 60 min before the Cindy workout. Performance, RPE, muscular power (MP), handgrip strength (HGS), and maximum heart rate (MHR) were measured before and shortly after the Cindy.Results The performance of CrossFit participants during the Cindy protocol was not significantly improved following CAF, NaHCO3, and CAF + NaHCO3 (P > 0.05). In contrast, RPE during and at the end of the Cindy was significantly decreased following CAF + NaHCO3 consumption compared to PLA and CON (P = 0.001, P = 0.02). However, MP (P = 0.82) and HGS (P = 0.52) were not significantly different between conditions. Also, MHR was significantly greater following CAF, NaHCO3, and CAF + NaHCO3 consumption than CON (P = 0.01).Conclusion CAF + NaHCO3 supplementation decreased RPE despite significantly increased MHR, but with no significant effect on performance, HGS, or MP. Therefore, CrossFit participants may benefit from the ergogenic effects of CAF and NaHCO3 when consumed separately or together.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15502783.2023.2206390

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There was lack of clarity in Ziyaiyan et al. 2023's reporting on whether the difference in GIS was statistically significant and what conditions served as comparisons.

    “However, there was lack of clarity of reporting on whether this was statistically significant and what conditions were serving as the comparisons.”

    From Gastrointestinal Symptoms Associated With Sodium Bicarbonate Supplementation Protocols: A Systematic Review (2026) · cites this paper as Ziyaiyan et al. 2023

    The Results section (‘Gastrointestinal symptoms’; page unavailable) explicitly calls the GI side effects significant and identifies the placebo group as the comparator for both the combined caffeine–sodium bicarbonate and sodium bicarbonate conditions. The Discussion repeats those comparisons, contrary to the claim that significance and comparators were unclear. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Rezaei et al. 2019, Sarshin et al. 2021, and Ziyaiyan et al. 2023 provided meals containing 1.5 g/kg carbohydrate alongside sodium bicarbonate at the time of the final dose before exercise.

    “Worth noting, (Rezaei et al. 2019), (Sarshin et al. 2021), and (Ziyaiyan et al. 2023) provided meals containing 1.5 g/kg carbohydrate alongside sodium bicarbonate at the time of the final dose before exercise.”

    From Gastrointestinal Symptoms Associated With Sodium Bicarbonate Supplementation Protocols: A Systematic Review (2026) · cites this paper as Ziyaiyan et al. 2023

    Methods > Dietary control reports a standardized snack containing 1.5 g/kg body weight of carbohydrate 150 minutes before the protocol. Methods > Supplementation protocol says the final sodium bicarbonate capsule was administered 60 minutes before the protocol, so the snack was not provided alongside the final dose. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Rezaei et al. 2019 and Ziyaiyan et al. 2023 provided 0.3 g/kg/day sodium bicarbonate over a three-day span, both alone and alongside caffeine.

    “(Rezaei et al. 2019) and (Ziyaiyan et al. 2023) provided 0.3 g/kg/day over a three‐day span, both alone and alongside caffeine.”
  • Three chronic dosing studies provided sodium bicarbonate in gelatin capsules.

    “Three studies provided sodium bicarbonate in gelatin capsules (Delextrat et al. 2018; Rezaei et al. 2019; Ziyaiyan et al. 2023)”
  • Three chronic-dosing studies made no mention of timing of GIS assessment whatsoever (Sarshin et al. 2021; Rezaei et al. 2019; Ziyaiyan et al. 2023).

    “while an additional three studies made no mention of timing whatsoever (Sarshin et al. 2021; Rezaei et al. 2019; Ziyaiyan et al. 2023).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ziyaiyan, A., Shabkhiz, F., & Hofmeister, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Tehran (IR)
  • Department Food and Nutrition, Consumer Centre of the German Federal State of Bavaria, Munich, Germany
Corresponding author
Shabkhiz, Fatemeh
Venue
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
Published
2023-05-08
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
2206390-2206390
ISSN
1550-2783 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4375856105
Cited by
15
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4
FWCI
4.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
no funding
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Muscle metabolism and nutrition
Keywords
caffeine supplementation, sodium bicarbonate supplementation, CrossFit, rating of perceived exertion, muscle power, grip strength, maximal heart rate, ergogenic aids, dietary supplementation, high-intensity functional training, powerlifting, gymnastics, weightlifting
MeSH terms
Adult, Caffeine, Double-Blind Method, Humans, Polyesters, Sodium Bicarbonate, Cross-Over Studies, Hand Strength, Dietary Supplements, Athletic Performance, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review